@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

Zak

@Zak@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

It’s reasonable for an app like this to need root, but also reasonable for everyone to ask for third-party verification of anything they’re granting administrative access to their devices.

Izzydroid’s security policy appears to be primarily based around automated scans that enumerate badness, and has far fewer users than the official F-Droid repository making it less likely that problems will be noticed, reported, and acted on.

Is there more reputation information about this app available?

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

I’m not complaining. I’m asking for some evidence this app is trustworthy.

Security is not binary. Having root can be bad for security, but it doesn’t have to be especially if you’re careful about what apps you grant root to, which is the point of my original comment. Having root can also be a security benefit because it offers more opportunities for detecting and blocking harmful and privacy-invasive apps, as this app does (if it’s trustworthy).

I don’t think F-Droid with the official repositories is a negative for security either; I suspect it’s less likely to contain outright malware than Google Play, and I’m sure the average app on F-Droid is less likely to be privacy-invasive. Adding random repositories suggested by strangers on the internet can be a different story, and asking who can vouch for the one suggested in this thread seems like a reasonable mitigation to me.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

There may be some other comments being unfair. People shouldn’t complain about free software someone else gives to them falling short of perfection, but we should be careful about granting random apps root permissions.

Having root is almost never a security benefit, it allows you to close one hole, but opens up 10 new more

I think it’s more like two:

  • If an app granted root privileges is compromised, the damage it can cause is much greater
  • The bootloader has to be unlocked for most approaches to gaining root; I consider it a design flaw that it isn’t easier for users to add signing keys and re-lock the bootloader

F-droid is not secure, some of the issues had been resolved, but it’s still not recommended for best practices

This is another very binary statement about security. The article addresses a number of design issues with F-Droid and concludes that most users are better off getting apps from Google Play. I don’t disagree with the design complaints in theory, but in practice it doesn’t hold up. I’ve seen people get malware from Google Play and read a number of documented cases. I have never heard of malware in the official F-Droid repository.

I’m reminded of comparing Windows to Linux 20 years ago. In theory, Windows had a more sophisticated permissions model and more reliable logging, making it potentially more secure. In practice, it took significant care to keep a Windows desktop clean, while Linux was very unlikely to be compromised.

Of course someone with high-value secrets on their device or who’s likely to be directly targeted by sophisticated threats should probably take a more conservative approach, install very few apps, and consider a hardened ROM like GrapheneOS.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

I did not know that it was possible to have root on GrapheneOS with a locked bootloader, but there have been ROMs with SU functionality built in, and adding their keys would be a straightforward way to have root and a locked bootloader.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

This app wants root and despite being open source according to that link, isnt in the official F-Droid repo. I’m skeptical about trusting it.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

I’m surprised users find the app store that compelling for a one-time “install” with updates not a factor. Do they cite any other reasons for wanting a different approach?

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

The number I’ve seen floating around a few places is that app users are, on average seven times more profitable than web users. Reasons include:

  • The app being on the device acts as a reminder to the user to interact more
  • It’s easier for an app to send notifications to get users to open it and interact more (Android has reduced this by requiring permission; browsers required it long before)
  • There are more limited options for blocking ads in an app
  • There are more opportunities to collect data in an app

Are there any good reasons for it, too? Security, maybe?

Security for the user? Probably not. “Security” for the developer in that they can prevent people from using the app in ways that aren’t profitable? Likely.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

I don’t think anyone can give you good advice without knowing the reasons you’d rather not get in to.

I can think of various scenarios where some sort of minimal internet presence under your real name would be useful for social or employment reasons, but exactly what it is you’re trying to accomplish makes a big difference in terms of what tools (including corporate platforms, federated microblogging like Mastodon, a blog, or a static website) will get you the results you want.

What’s popular where you live or in your professional field matters too. For some people, not using Facebook or Linkedin specifically is unusual, but we don’t have enough information to know if that’s true for you.

Zak, (edited )
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

Your server sends a message to other servers saying what you voted or replied.

A reply dialog being slow to open sounds like an issue with your client, not federation.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

Screen locking has obvious use cases.

Zak, (edited )
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

In the modern era, the main purpose of a screen saver is to lock the screen, and has been for most users for a long time. Many of us would also like to have pretty pictures on our locked screens.

It no longer has anything to do with preventing burn-in, so you’re right from a certain point of view.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

To quote its author

On X11 systems, XScreenSaver is two things: it is both a large collection of screen savers; and it is also the framework for blanking and locking the screen.

Question for legal folks: Travel based abortion restrictions

Texas and I believe a few other states have passed anti-abortion laws that attempt to cover people leaving their states to seek safe and legal abortions. The ones I’m familiar with (as I recall) applied to things like traveling on state-owned roads to seek an abortion out of state....

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

The US constitution forbids states from creating ex post facto crimes, and the jurisdiction of state laws does not extend into other states. Texas cannot make it a crime to have an abortion in California, nor to have previously had an abortion in California.

Texas may be able to make it a crime to leave Texas for the purpose of having an abortion. That would make creating any evidence of the reason for travel, or providing explanations to authorities dangerous.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

Texas can however make it illegal to have drugs in your system while in Texas

I’m not sure that’s actually a crime in Texas (please link a law if you know of one), and using it as evidence of prior drug possession is legally iffy as this Ohio case shows. In your example of consuming cannabis in California before traveling to Texas, it would be an even more difficult case for Texas prosecutors.

I don’t want the parole thing to confuse the issue

It does though; parole can include restrictions like “pass random drug tests”, “don’t drink alcohol”, etc… that can’t be imposed on people without a prior criminal conviction. It’s probably best to leave parole out of the discussion entirely.

the concern is ipso facto the termination.

When it comes to an abortion outside the state, the laws I’m aware of concern travel for the purpose of abortion. An alternate purpose for the travel could be useful as a defense, but that’s best delivered by one’s lawyer after charges are filed.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

My real question now is whether the defendant could state

If you’re being investigated by law enforcement in the USA, you have the right to remain silent. Use it.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

And people wonder why I care so much about my phone having an analog headphone jack.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

It may be, but self-hosted isn’t suitable for the audience I’m talking about.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

Nobody is interested in finding an RSS feed. People are interested in getting updates when writers they like post new writing, when bands they like post new tour dates, etc…

One of the use cases I have in mind is styling an RSS feed as a web page and including a short explanation of how to use it. That comes with a need to suggest specific software.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

I’m coming at it from the opposite side; social media isn’t a reasonable alternative to RSS, but people often use it as such. RSS is as you say, for getting updates from specific sources without being at the mercy of a third-party’s recommendation algorithm.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

Unfortunately, Flym seems to be discontinued (according to its F-Droid entry). Google Play won’t install it on newer versions of Android because it’s built for older versions. I can’t use it for this use case for that reason.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

It still installs and runs on Android 13, but Google Play won’t give it to you. I’m going to assume from the username you don’t need instructions.

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

I’m not very aggressive about disabling[0] notifications. I don’t install apps that try to sell me stuff or otherwise manipulate me though so it’s rare I get unwanted notifications.

Quite a few commercial apps have perfectly good websites, and I use those in preference to apps most of the time.

[0] Technically just not enabling; Android now requires them to ask for permission before sending any

Zak,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

That’s true in the sense that if a very sophisticated organization directly targets your family chat for surveillance, they’re going to find a way to access its content no matter what communication method you use.

Threat modeling is core to security, and that kind of threat probably isn’t the issue here. Mass surveillance, both government and corporate is, and neither is likely to secretly install malware on a family-members phone that can access the contents of the group chat. Doing that to large numbers of people would get them caught; they save it for valuable targets.

Governments openly forcing the install of spyware, as I’ve read China does in some cases would be an exception; you cannot have a secure conversation involving a device so compromised.

Zak, (edited )
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

What do you mean by “trust”?

Do I trust that vanilla Lemmy code doesn’t contain something nefarious, such as code that detects political positions it doesn’t like and reduces their visibility? Sure. It would be hard to hide something like that.

Do I trust that major servers aren’t secretly running software that manipulates content? Mostly yes. I think it would get noticed since there are lots of vanilla servers to compare behavior to.

Do I trust that all the software is well-designed and bug-free? I write software for a living. No software is bug-free and most of it isn’t well-designed.

Do I trust that everyone who runs a fediverse server isn’t an asshole? Absolutely not. Any jackass can run a server. I run a Mastodon server (on which all users are me).

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #